Back in the 1990's, CSERC was the main conservation group pressing the Stanislaus Forest to implement its "on-paper" policy that banned off-highway-vehicle (OHV) riders from simply driving up any hillside or across streams or meadows.  Due to a lack of political will by Forest officials, five different Stanislaus Forest supervisors over the past 14 years failed to enforce legally approved regulations to halt such illegal "motorized travel."  The results were miles of user-created motorcycle and all-terrain-vehicle trails threading up hillsides, slicing across streams, and cutting through important wildlife areas.    Four years ago, a new OHV Plan process began. This time Forest officials promised to not only halt cross-country motorized use, but to also review the 200 miles of unauthorized, user-created OHV routes that already existed at that time in the forest.  They also promised to close OHV routes that were inappropriate for use.  In the meantime, the trade-off ended up being that every user-created route that had ever been created without any approval or environmental review now became legal for OHV use.  Forest officials put all such routes on a "spaghetti" map of squiggly lines, and then asked the public which routes should be closed and which ones OHV users wanted to see kept open.  Most OHV riders wanted them all to stay open.

  Frustrated by the process, CSERC led the conservation community charge to actively engage in the OHV plan.  CSERC staff walked miles of unauthorized routes to take photos of erosion and deep ruts.  CSERC staff attended meeting after meeting -- from White Pines to Greeley Hill to West Point to Modesto.  CSERC's director met repeatedly with Forest officials, agency specialists, and various interest groups.  The Center reviewed the Forest's first Proposed Action plan and submitted highly detailed comments.  Then the process changed.  Due to national direction for each individual forest to do a "motorized travel management" plan, the Stanislaus Forest's OHV plan was merged into a broader planning process.   Switching gears, the Forest began analyzing how far to allow forest visitors to park off roads when camping in dispersed sites scattered all over the forest. Agency officials also began looking at changing management on many roads within the Stanislaus Forest, proposing to close some roads to cars or trucks and to convert them to new routes for OHV use.

  The national policy direction also aimed for each national forest to assess the thousands of miles of roads within its boundaries and to complete an assessment of which roads were truly needed and which should be closed or decommissioned.  The Stanislaus Forest, however, determined that it did not have the time or staffing available to do that "minimum necessary road system" plan.  So instead Forest officials focused on developing a plan to add new OHV routes to the 95 miles of OHV trails and 1,400+ miles of roads already open to OHV use.  The damage done by OHV use didn't seem to matter.

  At motorized travel planning meetings, many pro-motorized participants railed against any changes to the road system or any reduction in miles of OHV routes available for motorcycles and all-terrain-vehicles (ATV's) to use. 

  CSERC staff pointed out that there are a total of roughly 6,000 miles of existing roads within the boundaries of the Forest.  If the Forest Service actually found the will to close off hundreds of miles of routes that are unnecessary or causing environmental damage, there would still be thousands of miles of county, private, state, and Forest Service roads open for access to camping, hunting, or other forest uses. 

  But pro-motorized interests ignored those facts, and many OHV clubs and motorized-use coalition members gathered petitions or rallied letter-writers to push for the maximum level of roads and OHV routes to be approved for continued use.

  Even Tuolumne County supervisors jumped into the Travel Management Plan debate.  One strong pro-use supervisor drafted up a long comment letter to the Forest Service, insisting that the Stanislaus Forest must not close roads and must not let environmental damage be the deciding factor in road decisions. 

  When that letter came up for public input, CSERC opposed sending such a biased letter to the Forest Service.  CSERC led concerned citizens in testifying that OHV use disturbs the vast majority of tourists who come to the Stanislaus Forest seeking quiet recreation.  Those who enjoy camping, hiking, bird-watching, or other kinds of quiet recreation are often offended by noisy, speeding OHV riders.

  CSERC also pointed out that water resources that are vital to county residents can be contaminated with sediments from poorly maintained roads and OHV routes.  (The route in the photo at right as a classic example of erosion and sedimentation washing down into a stream below.)  After the two weeks of public input, enough public comments of concern were shared that the County supervisors eventually sent a less aggressive, less demanding comment letter to the Forest Service. 

  Over recent months, CSERC staff spent week after week of available time going over more than 1,000 unauthorized OHV route segments, road segments, or dispersed camping spurs that are part of the Stanislaus Forest Motorized Travel plan.  In an intensive review of the EIS, maps, and appendices, CSERC biologists painstakingly reviewed hundreds of pages of analysis, compared it with years of CSERC field knowledge, and added in extensive current information.  Our eyes were glazed from reviewing so many roads and routes.

The end result was a highly detailed list of specific recommendations for hundreds of route segments, roads, and dispersed access spurs.  CSERC staff wrote 60 pages of comments and recommendations.  CSERC biologists also used their GIS expertise to create a highly complex travel management map for the Stanislaus Forest that was nearly identical to the agency's own map.  CSERC's version showed where environmentally beneficial changes to the Forest Service 's "Proposed Action" alternative would produce a Travel Management plan that was far more balanced, far less polarizing, and far more sensitive to forest resources -- and to the private property owners who have in-holdings within the boundaries of the Stanislaus Forest.

  After so many years of key Forest officials being reluctant to enforce tough regulations for OHV riders, it remains to be seen if CSERC's carefully crafted compromise proposal will lead to any greater protection for wildlife, water resources, and the vast majority of forest visitors who seek quiet recreation.  As the photos in this newsletter reveal, OHV use has already caused extensive watershed and soil impacts.  What photos don't show is that OHV's roaring noisily through goshawk or spotted owl nest stands can drive parent birds off their nests and leave chicks or fledglings vulnerable to predators.  OHV use in important deer habitat areas can stress does about to give birth or stress wintering deer already weak due to frigid weather and limited food.  CSERC strongly believes that "fun and games" for OHV riders should not be given a higher priority than ensuring that at-risk wildlife species are fully and adequately protected from OHV disturbance.

  By the next newsletter, a final Motorized Travel EIS may be released, and a decision later this fall is anticipated.  CSERC thanks all our members who took the time to write personal comment letters on this issue.  Our hope is that Forest officials heard your concerns and will honestly aim for a decision that aims for the greatest good for the greatest number.